Book by Sen. Tom Coburn says Newt Gingrich drained lifeblood from Republican revolution

When Dr. Coburn says Gingrich would be “the last person I'd vote for for president of the United States,” then you know that Gingrich is no small government conservative and is probably as arrogant as they come.  In a choice between the words of Dr. Coburn and Newt Gingrich, I will Dr. Tom 100% of the time.  I trust my Senator when he speaks and don't trust a thing Gingrich says.  His track record is one of what is best for Newt not for the country or for people who work around him.  Newt would spend our tax dollars on pet projects which is what he tried to do as Speaker.  He thinks he is smarter than almost anyone else.  If you don't believe me, listen to his arrogance in saying he will be the nominee.  Not with my vote he won't as I join Dr. Coburn.

Coburn said Gingrich usually made freshmen feel “as if we didn't have much value because we didn't know anything about the political game in Washington. … It would not take long for us to become ‘the conservatives' to him.”

Too many sources are saying that Gingrich did not get along well with conservatives in the House as he preferred to deal with Democrats then small government conservatives like Dr. Coburn,. Joe Scarborough, Steve Largent, and others.  Arrogance to the core from Gingrich.  Why is he the Fox flavor of the week when he declares he is smarter than all the Fox pundits.  Is there anyone in America who is smarter than Gingrich?  (sarcasm)

If Gingrich is half as arrogant as he comes across, he has the capability of being worse than Obama flying around in AF One and enjoying all the trappings of the Presidency like he is a king.  He was not a team player as speaker so why would that change as President.  He is not conservative when it comes to the economy, healthcare, global warming, and he is not the most conservative on pro-life unless it gets votes.  The head of NH Right to Life just endorsed Rick Perry which speaks volumes.

Ethics and Gingrich should not be used in the same sentence and I apologize for doing just that.  My complaint in the past has been if you are running for President your life should be an open book and that includes ethics complaints in the House which Newt is fighting his former friend Pelosi on releasing.  The most bizarre part are some conservative sites wanting them kept secret?  The same sites that demanded Obama release his records now say ethics complaints against Gingrich should not be released.  Hypocrisy at its finest is on display from some conservative pundits and writers in this election.

Book by Sen. Tom Coburn says Newt Gingrich drained lifeblood from Republican revolution

Oklahoma U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn's recent criticisms of Newt Gingrich's leadership are tied to clashes in the 1990s when the two served in the U.S. House 

BY CHRIS CASTEEL ccasteel@opubco.com
Published: December 7, 2011 

WASHINGTON — Sen. Tom Coburn, who said Sunday that he would have trouble supporting Newt Gingrich for president, described the former U.S. House speaker in his 2003 book as a “Career Republican” who looked down on a band of conservatives seeking to curtail government spending. 

As told in “Breach of Trust,” written by Coburn after he left the U.S. House and before he ran for the U.S. Senate, Gingrich's leadership “seemed erratic” after the 1995 government shutdown. Coburn also wrote that the speaker had “an inability to discipline himself in his public comments.” 

Coburn, R-Muskogee, and other conservatives clashed with Gingrich several times over spending, and some talked in 1997 about removing him as speaker. 

Gingrich, who resigned from the House in 1998, is gaining strength in the Republican presidential field and leads in the early caucus state of Iowa, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released Tuesday. 

Coburn's criticisms 

On Fox News on Sunday, Coburn said he found Gingrich's leadership lacking but declined to provide more details. At a town-hall meeting in Oklahoma last year, Coburn said Gingrich was “the last person I'd vote for for president of the United States,” the Tulsa World reported. 

At that meeting, Coburn said Gingrich, who has been divorced twice, doesn't have a commitment to marriage and that “his life indicates he does not have a commitment to the character traits necessary to be a great president.” 

In his book, Coburn limits his criticisms of Gingrich to policy matters, mostly about the budget.
Coburn was part of the 1994 freshman class that gave Republicans control of the House for the first time in 40 years. According to Coburn, Gingrich ultimately abandoned the principles that drove the Republican resurgence and failed to keep promises to slash spending. 

“From the perspective of many members of the class of 1994, it was Gingrich who had drained the lifeblood from the Republican revolution with some of his political decisions,'' Coburn wrote. 

Didn't feel valued 

Coburn said Gingrich usually made freshmen feel “as if we didn't have much value because we didn't know anything about the political game in Washington. … It would not take long for us to become ‘the conservatives' to him.” 

Coburn has not endorsed a Republican presidential candidate for 2012. In 2008, he campaigned for Republican Sen. John McCain in the primaries and the general election.

Read more: The Oklahoman

Thank you Dr. Coburn for your honesty on Newt Gingrich -- very refreshing to see someone step forward and give us the facts that Newt Gingrich did not value 'the conservatives' in the House who were elected in 1994.  That says a lot about Newt's real ideology which is more moderate than he portrays.

Oklahoma's Coburn says he'd have trouble backing Gingrich for president

Agree 100% that I would have trouble supporting Gingrich for president.  Dr. Coburn is one of quite a few conservatives who had trouble with Gingrich during his time as Speaker.  His open door policy was only for Democrats.  Shame Fox News doesn't see fit to give us the truth about Gingrich as they push one of their pundits for President.  Gingrich is a big government type and should never be considered a fiscal conservative even a little.  His track record is horrible when it comes to being conservative.  Gingrich is out for Newt and no one else.  His trashing Democrats is a recent flip flop after years of playing up to them.  Anyone who swallows he wouldn't sell out conservatives again isn't thinking.

Newt Gingrich is the Fox flavor of the week right now.  He cannot stand up to scrutiny over the long haul because paling around with Pelosi, Hillary, Daschle, and Rev Al Sharpton for an Obama initiative should make any Republican cringe.

Thanks to Dr. Coburn for speaking out!  We need more people who served with Gingrich to tell the truth and not keep quiet when we are talking about the Presidency.  Right now Gingrich is pulling a scam pretending to be conservative but those who know him best see right through his charade.  Conservative leaning media led by Fox pundits is doing the same thing for Gingrich the liberal media did for Obama -- lack of ethics on the part of media not to tell the truth.  Why not report that Gingrich is extremely arrogant and thinks he has the ONLY answers?

Oklahoma's Coburn says he'd have trouble backing Gingrich for president 

In appearance Fox News Sunday, Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn said he wasn't impressed with Newt Gingrich's leadership when he was speaker of the U.S. House in the 1990s. 

By Chris Casteel ccasteel@opubco.com
4 December 2011 

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn said he would have trouble supporting Newt Gingrich for president because the Republican's leadership was “lacking” when he was speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Coburn, R-Muskogee, told Chris Wallace, “I'm not inclined to be a supporter of Newt Gingrich, having served under him for four years and experienced personally his leadership.” 

Coburn was part of the freshman class of 1995, when Republicans took over the House for the first time in forty years and made Gingrich, then a House member from Georgia, their speaker. Coburn was also part of a small group of House Republicans who talked about ousting Gingrich in 1997, a year before Gingrich resigned his seat. 

Pressed by Wallace about why he couldn't support Gingrich, Coburn said there were “all types of leaders, leaders that instill confidence, leaders that are somewhat abrupt and brisk, leaders that have one standard for the people that they are leading and a different standard for themselves. I just found his leadership lacking and I'm not going to go into greater detail in that.” 

Coburn's comments came as Gingrich is gaining in the polls as the first Republican presidential primaries approach. Though his campaign faltered at the outset, he now leads in Iowa, according to a Des Moines Register poll released Saturday. 

‘Making hard choices' 

On the Fox News show, Coburn also predicted Congress would extend the payroll tax cut that has benefited workers this year and long-term unemployment benefits, but he said each of the initiatives should be matched with spending cuts so they don't add to the deficit. 

“Nobody is making hard choices now,'' Coburn said. “What they are doing is promising a benefit and no pain now. It always comes later.” 

Coburn and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, also said there was a chance that Congress could pass the $4 trillion deficit reduction plan developed last year by President Barack Obama's bipartisan fiscal commission; Coburn and Conrad served on that commission. 

“I think we have a good basis with which to come together — reforming the tax code, generating the additional revenue, modifying the long-term problems associated with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,” Coburn said. “I think we can do it.”

Read more: The Oklahoman 

Reports of a Debt Compromise are Circulating this Morning

This article from John Podhoretz is very good of explanation of what is going on today about some of the Republicans we have in the Congress who will vote "NO" when they don't get 100% of what they want for their agenda.  I am still shocked that there are members of Congress and Tea Party leaders who actually thought we could take over the House, and we were going to bully our way into getting something passed immediately to roll back and cut the deficit when there was a Democrat Senate and a Democrat President. 

It takes two election cycles to make a real agenda change but these people are demanding it now or they will vote NO!  One of them, Bachmann wants to run for President on the Republican ticket -- we would suggest she would be better off with her mentor Ron Paul to run as Libertarians because being NO all the time is not what thinking Republicans are all about.  The best one is thinking the Balanced Budget Amendment is going to pass the Senate -- no way that is happening with this Senate.  Taking a vote on the BBA is one thing that should happen to set the stage for after 2012 but passing -- not in your wildest dreams. 

After reading this column by Podhoretz, all I could think is that he nailed it as he explains a lot of the difference between the common sense Republican conservatives where I belong and the 'my way or no way' crowd where you find Bachmann, DeMint, the Paul's, Lee (UT), and now Palin. 

Containment, Rollback, and the Debt Compromise 

John Podhoretz


07.31.2011 - 9:12 AM

As of now—Sunday morning—word is there’s a deal between the White House and Republicans on a deal to raise the debt ceiling. No tax increases. $1 trillion in immediate budget cuts. A required $1.5 trillion in cuts by November as designed by a bipartisan committee or (if the House and Senate do not agree on them) automatic cuts to Medicare (to scare Democrats) and Defense (to scare Republicans).

If the details are true, and the deal holds, it’s an astonishing achievement for the Right—the most significant conceptual shift in American politics since Bill Clinton​ announced his support for ending welfare in 1996. Without question, there are elements on the Right that will not see it this way—that will say the deal is a sellout, that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are craven, they are enablers, they are carrying Obama’s water. I’d like to suggest a political analogy from the past that might help explain why they are wrong and why they are being unjust to those who support a deal.

In the wake of the effective Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe after the second world war, the fall of China to Mao, and North Korea’s invasion of South Korea, American anti-Communism split into two camps. One camp actively advocated what was called “rollback”—the application of military force to force the Soviets and their clients to retreat from the countries they had overrun. The other camp supported the doctrine of “containment,” which argued for quarantining Communism within the countries that had fallen under Soviet domination and remaining in a state of cold war with the Soviets and their proxies.

Both rollback and containment had as their goal the defeat of the Soviet Union and world Communism. But the strategies were different. The rollbackers said the peril was so imminent the failure to effect the change immediately would lead to the inevitably victory of the Communists. The containment advocates said we did not have the means to roll back Communism militarily, but if we held the line, over time Communism would self-destruct owing to its evil, its impracticality, and its inability to compete with the free peoples of the West.

(snip)

The supporters of rollback were uninterested in the political reality of that moment. They believed the U.S. was locked in a titanic moral struggle literally between the forces of evil and the forces of good, and anything less than the commitment of all available resources to win the battle was a form of surrender. They were morally in the right, but practically in the wrong.

Today those who oppose raising the debt ceiling on the grounds that we need to solve the debt crisis immediately or we will be destroyed by it are the direct descendants of those who supported rollback.

Everyone on the Right agrees that the U.S. is on an unsustainable fiscal path that must be altered. The difference comes down to the acceptance of political realities. Just as the United States could not effect rollback in the late 1940s (or any time thereafter), so too the Right and the Republican Party cannot effect a revolutionary change of course on July 31, 2011 with the Senate and the White House in liberal Democratic hands. The strategy, like containment, must have a longer time horizon, though it has the same goal: Ending the entitlement state before it swallows up the rest of the country.

The conceptual triumph of the Right is evident in two elements of the supposed deal. Take the fact that there are no new tax hikes. It was only 12 days ago that Barack Obama​ warned House Majority Leader Eric Cantor not to “call my bluff” and said he would go to “the American people on this.” He did; his poll numbers tanked. The “balanced approach” he advocated backfired on him even though he and his people continued to claim it had overwhelming popular support.

Now take the fact that in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling of $2.5 trillion, there will be corresponding dollar-for-dollar cuts. That establishes a new budgetary precedent, a rational and sound one, on the question of the national debt ceiling, one that will restrain presidents of both parties as we go forward.

So who are Obama and the Democrats in my analogy? They are the accommodationists of the early 1950s (and their progeny throughout the Cold War) who declared that the anti-Communist right was a hornet’s nest of crazy people who would ignite a war and get us all blown up. They wanted peace and harmony and cordial relations with the Soviets and their proxies just as the accommodationists today want to put their heads in the sand and refuse to face the moral and political and fiscal threat emanating from the entitlement state. Whereas the rollbackers were wrong strategically but right morally, the accommodationists were wrong strategically and wrong morally.

But those who advocated containment were right strategically and right morally. And their descendants are right to support the debt-ceiling deal. 

Excerpt:  Read More at Commentary Magazine

This article is filled with common sense.  We didn't get in this deficit over night and it is not going to fixed overnight.  There is little difference between the approach of the ones on the right and the ones on the left who put their own idiology first with their 'my way or no way' approach.  There are times you have no choice but to compromise to start the process of reaching your eventual goal of a balanced budget and no deficit.  Look what happened when Democrats controlled the House and Senate in big numbers along with the White House.  They rammed through the bills with no hearings as you had to pass the bills in some cases to learn what was in them. 

We just came through two years of that mentality but now some of the right think they can do the same thing.  They are not facing reality of the situation and frankly don't seem to care.  Both parties have to work together to solve the debt ceiling problem and the runaway deficit spending that started after 9/11.  The deficit spending took off big time after the Democrats took over the Congress in 2007 but we hadn't seen anything yet when they not only kept the Congress but elected Obama and grew their numbers to the point Republicans had a small voice.  There was no compromise, just runaway spending to repay their donors and allies and institute their socialist agenda.

Still haven't recovered from members of the Tea Party and the Palin letter threatening to primary Republicans like Lt Col Allen West and others on the afternoon of the vote on the Boehner bill.  Not a peep about defeating Democrats.  That seems to be a non-starter with the Tea Party leaders who are more concerned about making sure Republicans who don't follow what they want face primary opponents from the 'my way or no way' crowd while not saying a word about going after Democrats.  Is the goal of the Paulbots and Libertarians to take over the Republican Party along with the Congress?  We will have more on that in a later post as some research is already out there and more to come.

Republicans far out number the Ron Paul/Libertarian Tea Party members especially when you take away the Republican activists from some Tea Parties in TX and FL.    Those none Paul/Libertarian people are now being heard in the halls of Congress as they are calling and writing their Reps and Senators to get on board and solve this debt ceiling crises.  They are not willing to take a chance on what might happen.  The dire warnings are there.  You could compare it to a tornado or hurricane warning when they tell people to evacuate or go underground.  Sometimes it hits in different places or is not as deadly as they predict but along comes a major hit and some people are not prepared because they have convinced themselves it is not going to happen.  It is called not facing reality. 

Don't think you want to play around with default of the United States anymore than you do with a tornado or hurricane headed your way.  That would be foolish and why a compromise needs worked out -- no side is going to come out with everything they wanted but frankly that is what happens in negotiations.  Ever buy a house -- chances of you getting the price you offer unless it is full price is slim to none. 

It is time for Republicans who do not get out and demostrate, carry signs, or shout down members of Congress to be heard even more in the halls of Congress.  These are the people who work and pay the income tax who were dubbed the 'Silent Majority' a long time ago.  We will throw in some of the Independents who left after the 'my way or no way' crowd took over in their area.  Those common sense Republicans are being heard loud and clear -- negotiate, compromise to get the best deal possible, and then look to the future to elect more Republicans in the Senate and a common sense Republican in the White House to get the deficit under control and down to zero with making responsible cuts over a period of time.

You don't pay your House off in seven months after you buy it unless you strike it rich, so what makes anyone think we can cut all the deficit in seven months especially with our economy being so weak. 

Dr. Coburn (R-OK) has a plan he released, BACK IN BLACK, outlining thousands of detailed budget options within every federal department and nearly every major program that, if taken together, would result in savings of more than $9 trillion over the next decade.  Will all those cuts pass Congress, most likely not but Dr. Coburn will keep coming back and getting them a little at a time.  He understands how it works that you start small and then it grows.  He doesn't expect everything to happen over night but in the next decade.  That makes sense versus "I want it NOW" mentality.

This common sense Republican Conservative is proud to stand on the side of Dr. Coburn who understands to get what is best for America, that it it necessary in some cases to reach across the aisle and jointly work together to get the best results.  He is attacked from the far left and far right on many occasions.  Heard him called a RINO, sell out, traitor, for starters but words don't bother him and he keeps moving the ball forward a little at a time.

Dr. Coburn Email: 9,000,000,000,000 Ways to Balance the Budget Letter to Senate colleagues

A short time ago, this email from Dr. Coburn (R-OK) arrived in my inbox with a small sampling of what can be cut from the budget to start cutting the deficit.

Cannot believe someone making $1M a year had the nerve to apply for unemployment.  There is so much waste here that you no longer wonder how we got such a high deficit.  Time to do the right thing for America and start cutting.  Dr. Coburn has an excellent start in his email and you can view the full report, "Back in Black," at the following links:

Dr. Coburn’s full report is here. A section by section outline of the report is here. A summary of savings is here. Highlights of the report here.

Yet some members of the Tea Party and the right say he is not a conservative with a 100% conservative voting record and a plan to cut the deficit?  We will take more Dr. Coburn's any day of the week in the Senate as he doesn't hesitate to do the hard work to put a plan together.  His hardworking staff is AWESOME and always has been from day one when he went to the Senate in January of 2005.

This is a letter that Dr. Coburn sent to all of his Senate colleagues yesterday: 

July 27, 2011
9,000,000,000,000 Ways to Balance the Budget 

Dear Colleague, 

Nearly everyone in Washington agrees we must reduce the deficit, but few offer any specifics as to how to do it. Last week, I released a report, BACK IN BLACK, outlining thousands of detailed budget options within every federal department and nearly every major program that, if taken together, would result in savings of more than $9 trillion over the next decade. 

I do not expect anyone to agree with everything recommended in this report, but I expect everyone will find things with which they agree. With negotiations stalemated, I wanted to bring your attention to some very simple commonsense ideas I believe most of us—and most Americans—regardless of party or ideology could support that would save at least $355 billion. 

End Unemployment Payments to MillionairesSavings: $186 million over ten years
Nearly 3,000 households with incomes of $1 million or more were paid a total of $18.6 million in unemployment insurance benefits in 2008. Those earning $1 million a year do not need and should not qualify for unemployment compensation. 

Stop Payments to Dead PeopleSavings: Over $1 billion over ten years.
Washington sent over $1 billion to more than 250,000 deceased individuals over the past decade. The federal government paid for dead people’s prescriptions and wheelchairs, subsidized their farms, helped pay their rent, and even chipped in for their heating and air conditioning bills. Some of these payments were fraud, some were incompetence, and some were intentionally required by law. Congress should end payments to the dead and federal agencies should ensure beneficiaries and participants of government payments are, in fact, alive. 

Eliminate DuplicationSavings: At least $50 billion over ten years
In March, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report examining just 34 missions of the federal government and identified hundreds of duplicative and overlapping programs costing more than $215 billion a year. These included 47 separate job training programs, 88 economic development programs, 82 teacher quality programs, and 56 financial literacy programs. “Reducing or eliminating duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions of taxpayer dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and effective services,” GAO concluded. Another independent study identified at least 180 economic development programs within more than a dozen different agencies costing taxpayers about $17.9 billion annually. Duplication within the federal bureaucracy should be consolidated. 

Eliminate Sweet Heart Deals for Government ContractorsSavings: At least $2 billion over ten years
The federal government pays over $500 billion annually to contractors. In 2009, $170 billion worth of contracts were awarded without competition. Competitive bidding for government contracts helps ensure the highest-quality services for the lowest cost, while no-bid contracts waste billions of dollars with little apparent benefit to anyone other than contractors. No bid contracts should be eliminated. 

Collect Unpaid Taxes Owed by Federal EmployeesSavings: $1 billion over ten years
Nearly 100,000 civilian federal employees were delinquent on their federal income taxes in 2008. These federal employees owe a total of $962 million in unpaid federal income taxes. The IRS should collect these overdue taxes. 

Reduce Congress’ Spending on ItselfSavings: $3.82 billion over ten years
Since 2001, Congress has boosted its own budget by 55 percent. At the same time, the average American wage increased by only 23 percent. In real dollars, the budget of the House and Senate has grown by more than $1 billion over the last decade. Congress must lead by example and do more with less. Congress’ spending on itself should be reduced by at least 15 percent. 

Stop Overpaying Drug CompaniesSavings: $480 million over ten years
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) overpays pharmaceutical companies nearly a million dollars a week. According to the Government Accountability Office, drug companies were overpaid $3.9 million in a single month! HRSA should be required to routinely monitor prices to ensure taxpayers are not being overcharged and take immediate corrective action to recoup any excess payments. 

Reduce Unnecessary Government PrintingSavings: $4.9 billion over ten years
Federal agencies – excluding the Department of Defense – spend nearly $1.3 billion a year on routine office printing. A third of this printing is unnecessary, according to an independent analysis. Agencies should put an end to this wasteful habit and administrative accounts of each department should be reduced accordingly. 

Eliminate Unnecessary Printing of Congressional DocumentsSavings: $312.2 million
In the digital age, printed copies of Congressional reports and other documents are as likely to grace a landfill as a bookshelf. In 2010, nearly $100 million was allocated for Congressional Printing and Binding account. A representative of the Government Printing Office (GPO) recently testified, “70 percent of the GPO’s funds are used to digitize legislation, schedules and other federal records, while 30 percent is used to print hard copies.” Reducing the Congressional Printing account by 30 percent would put an end to the wasteful practice of printing and distributing congressional documents that are almost immediately thrown away. The documents would still be available online and users could decide whether or not to print hard copies. 

Get Rid of Unneeded Federal PropertiesSavings: $15 billion over ten years
The federal government has over 63,000 buildings that are underutilized and not utilized at all. This number has increased by more than 12,000 from only two years ago. It costs over $1.2 billion every year to operate these properties. The federal government should dispose of all excess properties within five years. According to the Obama Administration, at least $15 billion could be saved if the federal government gets rid of its unneeded properties. 

End Subsidy for Ethanol BlendingSavings: $2 billion one time savings
Ethanol producers reap the benefits of a vast array of government assistance, including tax credits, grants, loans, loan guarantees, federally-directed markets, and a federal minimum usage mandate. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit provides a 45-cent-per-gallon federal tax credit to producers who blend ethanol with gasoline. Ethanol-blended fuel is nearly a third less efficient than gasoline, has contributed to the increased price of corn, and can cause engine damage. Ethanol subsidies are outdated, duplicative, and have failed to meet the intended goals of greater energy independence with a cleaner fuel alternative. The ethanol tax credit should be eliminated immediately.

Reduce the Number of Limousines Owned by the GovernmentSavings: $115.5 million over ten years

In the past two years, the federal government’s limousine fleet has grown by 73 percent. The federal government had 238 limos in 2008 and that number reached 412 last year. The number of limos owned by the federal government should be reduced to its previous level. 

Reduce Federal Vehicle FleetSavings: $5.6 billion over ten years
Federal agencies own or lease over 662,000 cars, vans, sport-utility vehicles, trucks, buses and other vehicles. Since 2006, the federal vehicle fleet has grown by five percent and the cost of maintaining and servicing those vehicles has grown over 25 percent, to $4.6 billion. These vehicles consume about a million gallons of fuel per day. The General Services Administration will purchase more than 100 more vehicles this year. Instead, the number of vehicles in the federal fleet should be reduced by at least 20 percent. 

Reduce Junkets and Unnecessary TravelSavings: $43.3 billion over ten years
The federal government spends $15 billion on travel every year. All travel that is not mission-critical should be ended. 

Reduce Advertising by the Federal GovernmentSavings: $5.6 billion over ten years
The federal government spent almost $1 billion on advertising last year. While some advertising may be needed, much of it is wasteful and unnecessary and this amount should be cut in half. 

Limit the Amount Spent to Host Government ConferencesSavings: $1 billion over ten years
The federal government spent at least $2 billion on conferences between 2000 and 2006. Some conferences may provide important venues for exchanging ideas or providing training. Others appear to be little more than government funded vacations at beachside resorts and other exotic destinations. Traveling to meetings and hosting conferences are, in large part, no longer necessary with the availability of teleconferencing. Total spending on conferences should not exceed $100 million annually and conferences should only be held when other options are not feasible. 

Use Better Measure of Inflation to Determine Increases in Benefit PaymentsSavings: Approximately $180 billion over ten years
Many government benefits are automatically increased for inflation every year, based on the consumer price index (CPI). For more than 15 years, many budget experts have agreed the current CPI mechanism outpaces actual inflationary growth, causing the cost of government programs to rise rapidly. The Bureau of Labor Statistics developed a more accurate measure of inflation, known as Chained CPI, which over the last ten years has grown at a slightly slower rate than the current measure for CPI. Congress should adopt the recommendation of the President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to transition to Chained-CPI government wide to ensure this automatic spending increase is as accurate as possible to avoid uncontrolled automatic spending increases in federal programs.

Eliminate Hollywood Liaisons
Savings: $34.4 million over ten years

Many federal agencies have offices and programs to assist Hollywood movie producers and television execs, often with the goal of ensuring a positive portrayal of the federal government. The agencies have at least 14 employees costing $1.2 million. These should be eliminated. 

Stop Purchasing Excess LandSavings: $4.1 billion over ten years
The federal government has spent more than $430 million to purchase additional land since the start of the recent recession and more than $2.3 billion over the past decade. At the same time, the Department of the Interior maintenance backlog on public lands has surged to as high as $19.9 billion, resulting in serious risk to visitors and deteriorating conditions of important national treasures. The National Mall, for example, has been so neglected it has been called a national disgrace. Until the federal government can afford to take care of the land it already owns, it should be prohibited from purchasing additional land. 

End Payments for Coal Cleanup When Projects Have Been Certified as Being CompletedSavings: $1.23 billion over ten years
The federal government continues to send funds intended for the cleanup up abandoned coal mines to several states and tribes that have already been certified as completing their work. The funds are unrestricted and have essentially become slush funds. These dollars should be used only for their intended purpose and directed to states with abandoned sites, with excess amounts should be returned. 

Suspend the Automatic Pay Raise for Members of CongressSavings: $6 million over three years
Members of Congress typically receive an automatic pay raise every year. Congress voted to freeze the salary of its member for the past two years at $174,000. The pay for members of Congress should be frozen for at least three more years. 

Get the Department of Defense Out of Education and the Grocery Store BusinessSavings: $19 billion over ten years
The Department of Defense currently operates hundreds of grocery stores and dozens of elementary schools in the United States. These grocery stores are in the same communities that have Wal-Mart, Costco, Safeway, and other choices for military personnel. Instead of paying our soldiers more money and allowing them to choose where to shop, we subsidize thousands of federal employees to work in grocery stores around the country. Similarly, the Department of Defense employs thousands of teachers in a unique school district called the Department of Defense Education Activity. Under the Pentagon’s management, taxpayers are spending more than $50,000 per student enrolled in these schools. The Pentagon should shut down its education bureaucracy, send much of this money to bolster local public schools, and return the rest for debt reduction. 

Terminate HHS’s Community Economic Development ProgramSavings: $38 million over ten years.
The mission of the Community Economic Development program (CED) duplicates 180 other government development programs, has a very low success rate, and does not fit within the mission or expertise of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). According to HHS’s most recent report to the Congress, only one out of five funded projects within the CED program were successful. Due to its lack of success, duplicative nature, and inappropriate placement within HHS, CED should be eliminated. 

End Federal Subsidies to Wealthy Doctors and Hospitals for Health Information TechnologySavings: $15.6 billion over ten years.
The federal government mandates and subsidizes the use health information technology (IT) for doctors and hospitals, despite scant evidence doing so will lower costs. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the purchase of health IT by doctors and hospitals. 

Stop Medicare Payments for Uncovered ServicesSavings: $1.97 billion over ten years.
Medicare currently only pays for medically necessary chiropractic services, but a HHS Inspector General report found the program improperly spent $178 million on chiropractic services in 2006. Implementing and enforcing current policies, along with more careful reviews of documentation, could save taxpayers nearly $2 billion over a decade. 

This list is just a handful of the savings options contained within BACK IN BLACK. I would encourage you to review the thousands of other recommendations. I would also be interested in hearing other debt reduction ideas you might have. 

Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
U.S. Senator 

The headline makes you chuckle when know Dr. Coburn.  The only thing I could find wrong with the article was at the end when the author talked about Dr. Coburn putting reelection last.  We just elected him in 2010 for six more years.  When he ran for Senate in 2004, he said he would serve two terms and then retire so re-election for Dr. Coburn is not a thought.  It wouldn't make any difference if he was up for re-election, he would do the same thing.

We could use a lot more Dr. Coburn's in the Congress who put the Country first -- wouldn't be a bad idea to include the occupant of the White House on putting America first instead of his reelection.  Coburn has a 100% conservative rating but it is not good enough for some conservatives because horror of horrors he actually will work across the aisle for the benefit of America.  That is not a novel idea but it is one that has been missing for awhile from some of the hard headed people on both sides. 

This is my favorite part of the excerpt from the NY Times:

Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma was a Tea Partier long before the movement even had a name, the family physician who came to Washington to hammer on Democrats and Republicans alike.

Some people have asked why Oklahoma doesn't have a large Tea Party movement -- it is because we were the conservative grassroots here long before the Tea Party became the name of the day.  We are the ones who sent Dr. Tom to DC to hammer on both parties and their runaway spending.

In 2004. Dr. Coburn was joined by the Oklahoma grassroots to take on the GOP/Bush establishment candidate in the Republican Primary.  Heard the news he was getting in the race on the radio on my way to a Republican Women's Meeting.  His establishment opponent in the primary was going to be at the meeting.  When I told his aide that I heard on the radio Dr. Coburn was getting in the race, the candidate overheard and gave me a snarky reply filled with arrogance.  Next morning, I called the Coburn office and offered to do what I could to help him win.

In the end the establishment candidate showed his arrogance at a meeting which in turn tanked his campaign.  Dr. Coburn won the primary without a runoff, and he beat the Democrat pretending to be Conservative in the general.  Great day for Oklahoma and America when Oklahomans sent Dr. Coburn to the Senate to do exactly what he is doing.

Tom Coburn: Lady Gaga of Fiscal Conservatives

James Joyner · Sunday, July 24, 2011

If a crisis over the national debt is averted, Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn may be the unlikely hero.

NYT: “A Rock-Solid Conservative Who’s Willing to Bend”

Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma was a Tea Partier long before the movement even had a name, the family physician who came to Washington to hammer on Democrats and Republicans alike. His years of bill blocking earned him the nickname Dr. No.

Now that the debt limit negotiations between the White House and Republican lawmakers have collapsed, however, Mr. Coburn suddenly seems more like Dr. Probably. Months after he abruptly exited the so-called Gang of Six, a bipartisan group of senators in search of a solution to the nation’s increasing deficits, Mr. Coburn reappeared last week, saying he supported the group’s path. 

With that, he advocated revenue raising as a way to break the stalemate over the budget deficit, embroiling him in a verbal war with Grover Norquist, the activist responsible for the antitax pledge taken by so many Congressional Republicans. Mr. Coburn said Mr. Norquist“represents the silliness of our political situation today.”

And so Mr. Coburn, a Republican and one of the longest-standing deficit hawks on Capitol Hill, finds himself on a divergent path from the Tea Party newcomers whose spirit and politics he shares but whose means he is at odds with. It is a divide that underscores just how intractable the spending debate has become. 

But please don’t call him a moderate. “I have a 100 percent conservative rating,” Mr. Coburn, 63, said in an interview in his Senate office. “I’ve offered more ways to cut the government than anybody in the last 30 years in Congress. I know who I am and I know what I believe.” 

His conservative views were underscored Friday night when he issued a statement praising John A. Boehner, the House speaker, for holding out for more spending cuts. “Raising the debt limit without addressing the cause of our debt — out-of-control spending, especially in entitlements — will be as damaging as a default,” he said. 

Last week, Mr. Coburn presented his own plan to cut $9 trillion from the federal government over the next decade — far more than others have proposed — in a manner that would radically reduce government services but also produce $1 trillion in new tax revenues. 

President Obama invoked Mr. Coburn in his weekly radio and Internet address on Saturday, saying: “Earlier this week, one of the most conservative members of the Senate, Tom Coburn, announced his support for a balanced, bipartisan plan that shows promise. And then a funny thing happened. He received a round of applause — from a group of Republican and Democratic senators.” 

Mr. Coburn is known for objections that delay votes on bills for days, infuriating even his fellow Republicans. Yet he almost always strikes a deal eventually, as was the case recently with his plan to end ethanol subsidies. ”I’m contrarian,” he said. “I’m not much of a partisan. I go after Republicans as much as Democrats.” 

Mr. Coburn said that the 87 freshmen Republican House members are “the most wonderful thing to happen to our country in a long time,” and that they “are a fantastic addition to the debate in this country.” But he also talked about balancing the passion for ideas with the need to get on board with things you dislike in part, even sometimes in large part. ”The No. 1 thing people should do in Congress is stay true to their heart,” Mr. Coburn said. “But you have to recognize that we’re in a situation that’s dire for our country. If you put your name on something that will move the ball forward, you’re going to get hit.” 

[...] 

"Tom Coburn is very, very conservative,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. “He is a true believer, but he is one who can see the other side, which is not the case with what is going on in the House right now.” 

Mr. Coburn, who served on the president’s fiscal commission and then the Gang of Six, walked out of the group’s talks this spring over his request for $130 billion more in Medicare cuts than others had proposed. His exit devastated the other members, particularly the Republicans who needed his backing. 

When he saw the group’s presentation last week, he felt that it was no panacea for ending the impasse over raising the federal debt limit, but was the right start. ”My idea with the Gang of Six was to try and get something moving,” Mr. Coburn said. “Is it my ideal? Absolutely not. It is a compromise? Yes. Will it go a long way toward helping us get off the dead center? Yes. If I had my pleasure and I was king, we would lower revenues. But I’m not king. So that’s where I am.”

All emphases above added by author.

Coburn is way more socially conservative than I am and probably even more hard core on fiscal policy. But he’s smart, fairminded, and willing to adjust to the landscape around him. He’s also got his priorities in the right order: country, political principle, party, and re-election.

Source:  Outside the Beltway

Dr. Coburn's remarks on the Freshman Republican Congressman are so true.  This is not normal times and they have to be willing to listen and make those hard decisions that may not be the most popular but that will be good for the Country.

Too many people get caught up in ideology and forget sometimes you have no choice but to compromise for what is good for the whole Country.  We don't send people to Congress to only represent one group -- they are there to represent all their constituents and too many times that has been lost.  There are some Democrats who will only answer mail from supporters.  I would hope Republicans are doing a better job in answering mail and listening to their constituents.  NOTE that I said listening and did not say they had to take their advice.

What galls me in the NY Times article are the comments by Sen Schumer after the Republicans have just gone through four years of having bills rammed through the Congress especially the previous two where you had to pass a bill to read it according to Pelosi:

"Tom Coburn is very, very conservative,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. “He is a true believer, but he is one who can see the other side, which is not the case with what is going on in the House right now.” 

Under Pelosi for two years, most of the times Republicans were shut out of Committee meetings and not allowed to speak about bills the Democrats rammed through or even see the bills before they were passed.  Goes to show you that Shumer doesn't want to admit what got us to this point -- runway spending by the Democrats who rammed everything through but didn't have time to do a budget as they were getting us further in debt.  Schumer has a habit of sticking his foot in his mouth and this is one of those.

The fact Dr. Coburn will go after Democrats and Republicans on spending is what common sense conservatives will do when they see overspending or new programs that are not needed on both sides.  Republicans contributed to the runaway spending under President Bush but then a lot of it came after 9/11 which Democrats like to conveniently forget.  There were programs under President Bush that we thought were unnecessary and too expensive.  Now it looks like a drop in the bucket compared to the last four years -- first two when they controlled Congress with President Bush and especially the last two under Obama when the deficit became a runaway freight train.   Democrats with Obama just threw money everywhere they thought there might be votes in the future.  No thought was given to the deficit or to actually doing a budget.

Take the FAA fiasco with not yet extending their budget for the 21st time since September 2007 which happened when the Democrats were in charge of the Congress.  Now FAA is furloughing employees as the House and Senate have not agreed on their budget as it is conference committee.  Some airlines took advantage of no taxes to up their fares.  Will the FAA logjam finally break tomorrow?

Will Congress do the job they are sent to do instead of all this posturing to score points as they are sent there by the American people to work for us not grandstand.  This is one more fail on the part of Obama as his partisan attacks on Republicans finally bit him hard as he is no longer a part of negotiations.  With his anger visible his press conference Friday night when he attacked Republicans, he showed he is not able to handle when someone has the nerve to stand up to him as he let his anger show to the White House Press Corps.  Bad trait out of a President and someone who needs sent to the unemployment line in 2012.

Dr. Coburn on why the Senate should have the courage to pass 'Cut, Cap, and Balance'

Dr. Coburn on why the Senate should have the courage to pass 'Cut, Cap, and Balance'

Dr. Coburn's Floor speech on 'Cut, Cap and Balance' (part 1)

Dr. Coburn's Floor speech on 'Cut, Cap and Balance' (part 2)

Excerpts:
“You can't solve our problem unless you do what ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance’ wants to do. We've got to fix our country, and this is the only viable plan right now that will do that” (GOP Press Conference on Cut, Cap, & Balance 7/21/11)


“We have a solution that would let us go forward…let’s not let vanity get in the way” (Senate Floor 7/21/11)

“We have lived the last 30 years in this country on the backs of those who are going to pay the taxes for the next 30 years. It's time we start paying back. It's time we start giving back. You know, the senate is a different place today than when I came to the senate” (Senate Floor 7/21/11)


“Because if you don't pass a balanced budget amendment and you don't force the discipline, the political expediency of this country will continue to reign and the problem will not be solved” (Senate Floor 7/21/11)

“We're going to hear all sorts of reasons why you can't do things, all sorts of reasons why you couldn't come up with $9 trillion, but when the American people really know what's going on, if they really go and read about back in the black, really find out about all the ways, all the duplication, all the stupidity that goes on in our government, all the lack of accountability, the lack of responsibility in bureaucratic agencies, all the silly decisions that get made to spend billions of dollars that don't really help anybody, the tax code, tax earmarks and tax credits and tax expenditures are nothing but most of the time corporate welfare or socialism” (Senate Floor 7/21/11)


“We don't have a fiscal crisis. We have a common sense crisis in this body and in the leadership in congress. We lack common sense. We lack sound judgment. And we need the hard bit of a bridle put on us through a balanced budget amendment to control us, because human nature is human nature. And whatever we do today, we'll be back to our bad habits tomorrow. Even if we pass cuts, even if we cap spending, if we don't have a balanced budget amendment that forces us to live within the constraints of our revenue, we will be back there again.” (Senate Floor 7/21/11)

To read the entire transcript of Dr. Coburn's Senate Floor speech, please click here.

Related video:

Dr. Coburn at Cut, Cap and Balance press conference

As Dr. Coburn has pointed out in the press conference, the Gang of Six is working on a budget proposal not on the debt ceiling crises which many in the media have missed.  

One of my favorite parts of his floor speech is:  “We don't have a fiscal crisis. We have a common sense crisis in this body and in the leadership in congress. We lack common sense. We lack sound judgment."  That is so true!

For those going after Dr. Coburn for not being conservative, you should be ashamed at questioning this honorable man's conservative credentials but that hasn't stopped some from the right in the past and won't stop them now or in the future.  All I know is that people I know from all over the Country have a tremendous respect for Dr. Coburn and the fact he takes the time to put a plan together while others grandstand on why why won't support something.  This Country would be a lot better off with more Dr. Coburns and less of the "NO" crowd from both sides in the Congress.

Email from Dr. Coburn on "Back in Black" Release

U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. today released a new report “Back in Black” that outlines how the federal government can reduce the deficit by $9 trillion over the next ten years and balance the federal budget. The 614-page plan was the result of a thorough and exhaustive review of thousands of federal programs.

“The American people are tired of Washington waiting until the last minute to avoid a crisis, particularly when it is a crisis Washington itself created. The crisis, though, is not the debt limit deadline. The crisis is Congress’ refusal to make hard choices and reduce a debt that has become our greatest national security threat. The plan I am offering today gives Washington 9 trillion reasons to stop making excuses and start solving the problem,” Dr. Coburn said.

“Both parties will no doubt criticize portions of this plan and I welcome that debate. My goal is not to replace the work of the budget committees but to show the American people what is possible and necessary. What is not acceptable, however, is not having a plan and delaying reform until some perfect political moment that will never arrive. The fact is doing nothing is a tax increase, a benefit cut for seniors and the poor, and a betrayal of the core values both parties hold dear,” Dr. Coburn said.

Click here to view Dr. Coburn’s full report, click here for a section by section outline of the report, click here for a summary of savings and click here for highlights of the report.




Additionally, Dr. Coburn released the following report exposing wasteful government spending in Oklahoma. For the full report, click here.












Doctor Coburn has assembled a plan, Back in the Black, on how the United States can be in the black in ten years while the doom and gloomers have it a burden on our grandchildren when they are grown.  Instead of Dr. Coburn whining about the deficit, he and his staff set out to come up with a plan.  That is what being a United States Senator should be all about -- doing what is best for the Country.

Cannot wait to read about the wasteful spending in Oklahoma as I have been saying that since we moved to Oklahoma with the impending closure of the depot at Kelly AFB, San Antonio, TX.

CNN Breaking News: Obama to Agree to short-term extension of debt ceiling because the "Gang of Six"

President Obama would agree to a short-term extension of the federal debt ceiling if there is agreement on a significant deficit reduction plan by Democrats and Republicans that needs more time to be passed by Congress, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday.

Obama has steadfastly opposed a short-term deal, going as far as to threaten to veto any legislation that contained such provisions. But Obama declared a long-term deficit-reduction plan unveiled Tuesday by the bipartisan "Gang of Six" senators consistent with his approach to solving the problem. Senate Democratic leaders say that further negotiations on that plan are needed to work out the deal and it would not get through Congress before the country reaches its debt ceiling on August 2.

Just received this email from CNN and it makes sense since progress has been made by the "Gang of Six" -- their proposal is not perfect but when has any budget proposal been perfect.  No one gets everything they want when a bill is actually read before voting.  The key is the fact that it provides a path to future budgets as well as the current one.  Finally the Senate will be able to say they have a budget.  Then a Conference Committee from the House and Senate can iron out the differences so for the first time in two years, the United States will have a real budget with cuts in spending which the companies like Moody's will be happy and our rating will stay at the top. 

Too many people want it all now, but it is not going to happen.  Republicans control the House but do not control the Senate and the White House so anything the House passes will probably not pass the Senate even when it makes sense if it has to do with the budget.  Elections have consequences, and we are still seeing those consequences.  Too many members of Congress are so quick to say "NO" because they didn't get what they wanted.  Some comments out of some Senators are frankly naive and short sighted.  Disappointed that the immediate reaction of some was "NO" like someone was going to magically give them all they wanted.  

Must admit that Michelle Bachmann following Ron Paul's lead last night to vote against the House bill on the deficit showed that she will follow Ron Paul and do what he says instead of the smart thing.  We don't need Ron Paul or his protege anywhere near the White House with his attitude on our military which he would decimate and not think twice. 

We are still having a hard time figuring out how closing loopholes is raising taxes when the tax rate goes down.  There are loopholes in the Tax Code which should have been shut a long time ago but am getting emails telling everyone to call their Senator to stop the Tax increase.  Frankly we think the Dr. Coburn proposal on the Tax Code to simplify and shutdown loopholes is a great idea.  Loopholes should not be in the Tax Code and if closing them is considered a tax increase, then tough -- they need closed.

This process has been an eye opener.  We have members of Congress on one side working diligently hour after hour to try and get a compromise to protect the credit rating of the United States with the debt ceiling deadline approaching.  Then we have the other side from both parties who automatically said "NO" to any compromise putting politics ahead of the United States. 

We shouldn't be in this place to have to raise the debt ceiling but the last four years with all the new agenda items of the Democrats and Obama on top of the growth of the deficit under Bush have pushed this Country to the limit.  We didn't get there over night and this is not going to be solved over night but we have the beginning of the first steps to get the budget of the United States under control. 

Will put my faith in Dr. Coburn any day of the week over any Senator whose first reaction is NO to anything that is a compromise!  Dr. Coburn was sent to DC by Oklahomans to represent us to try and stop runaway spending.  He was opposed in 2004 by the establishment in DC led by President Bush, Karl Rove, and others because they knew when he said something he meant it and was not going to be a rubber stamp for new programs that cost the taxpayers money. 

Oklahoma grassroots of which I am proud to be a member went to work and with the help of Toomey's Club for Growth, we made him our nominee for the general election with no run-off election even though there were three people running.  The Bush person in our primary lost it at a function and made a jerk of himself right before the primary and Dr. Tom won going away.  Grassroots spent a lot of time working for Dr. Tom in the primary making phone calls hour after hour after hour and continued that in the general election.  It worked and he won the General Election. 

Of all the elections I have worked over the years, seeing Dr. Tom win was probably the highlight because so many Republicans in DC were against him at the beginning.  Now America can see why we sent Dr. Tom to DC as he is doing what we expected -- making the hard decisions and always having a plan to make things better.  If it means working across the aisle, he will do just that if it benefits Americans. 

Dr. Coburn is honest and puts America First by not only his words but by his actions.  This is one Oklahoman who is very proud of the work Dr. Coburn has done in the Senate and look forward to more of the same from the Doctor from Muskogee, Oklahoma.
  

Coburn proposes $9 trillion deficit cut measure

If the Congress had adopted the  Dr. Coburn, Sen Burr (R-NC), Rep Paul Ryan (R-WI), and Rep Deavin Nunes (R-CA)  their bicameral plan for healthcare, we wouldn't be stuck with the turkey of Obamacare. It was much, much shorter, made sense, and would have worked, but Obama, Pelosi, and Reid were not about to allow it to see the light of day.

When you see both sides squealing at Dr. Coburn's plan, it is likely a good plan.  Some people were complaining before they ever read the plan.  That seems to be catching in DC to go negative on a plan or bill before you read it or better yet voting on it so you know what is in the bill like Pelosi told everyone to do on Obamacare. 

What happened to doing your job as a member of Congress which means reading the bill before you vote instead of automatically voting yes or no depending on who submitted the bill.  Of everyone, Pelosi still stands out as the most egregious with her comments about the Obamacare vote.  She should have been removed as Speaker the minute she said you have to vote for the bill before you read it.  That is no way to run the House, but then we never figured out how someone so far left could be elected Speaker.

Dr. Coburn has been a bright light in the Senate because he truly does believe that as a Senator it is his responsibility to represent all Oklahomans and if that is working with someone from the other side of the aisle, he won't hesitate.   When you talk fiscal conservative, you need to put Dr. Coburn at the top of the list -- he doesn't just talk about being a fiscal conservative but he has a plan to cut the deficit while others prefer to get face time never giving a plan on what can be done.

Joining him at the top of the list is Cong Paul Ryan (R-WI) who is the same way as Dr. Coburn and believes if you are going to talk about something you better have a plan to fix it.  He also gets the same treatment when he offers a plan the negatives start before anyone can possibly have read it.  Both men have shown they are not afraid to put out a plan with the hard decisions in order to get America back on firm footing. 

We need more people in Congress like Coburn and Ryan who actually read bills and come up with their own plans to cut the deficit yet both men are targets of the left and a few on the right.  At the end of the day both of these honorable men can look in the mirror and know that are doing the real work of the people by coming up with a plan not just talking about what needs to be done.

Coburn proposes $9 trillion deficit cut measure

By ANDREW TAYLOR - Associated Press | AP – July 18, 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) — One of the Senate's staunchest budget-cutters unveiled Monday a massive plan to cut the nation's deficit by $9 trillion over the coming decade, including $1 trillion in tax increases opposed by most of his fellow Republicans.

The plan by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., is laced with politically perilous proposals like raising to 70 the age at which people can claim their full Social Security benefits. It would cut farm subsidies, Medicare, student aid, housing subsidies for the poor, and funding for community development grants. Coburn even takes on the powerful veterans' lobby by proposing that some veterans pay more for medical care and prescription drugs.

Coburn would also eliminate $1 trillion in tax breaks over the coming decade, earning him an immediate rebuke from Americans for Tax Reform, an anti-tax organization with which Coburn has had a running feud. He would block taxpayers from claiming the mortgage interest deduction on second homes and limit it to homes worth $500,000. He would also ease taxpayers into higher tax brackets more quickly by using a smaller measure of inflation to adjust the brackets.

Coburn was a member of President Barack Obama's fiscal commission and voted for its plan to cut the budget by about $4 trillion over a decade. He recently dropped out of the closely watched "Gang of Six" senators seeking a bipartisan agreement to rein in deficits and break through the partisanship engulfing official Washington over the deficit.

His re-entry into the deficit debate comes as Obama and lawmakers struggle over increasing the so-called debt limit and avoid a first-ever default on U.S. obligations.

Coburn's $9 trillion savings figure doesn't include another $2.4 trillion in cuts to Social Security that are funneled back into the program. In addition to raising the retirement age gradually, he would peg future benefits to a less-generous measure of inflation and curb benefit increases even more for the top 40 percent of earners.

Cuts to the Medicare program for the elderly and the Medicaid health plan for the poor and disabled would total $2.6 trillion over 10 years, far more than proposed by the fiscal commission or House Republicans. He proposes raising the Medicare retirement age to 67 by 2027 and then gradually increasing it until the retirement age hits 69 in 2080. It would also raise Medicare premiums for doctor visits so that premiums pay 35 percent of such costs instead of the 25 percent currently covered.

Coburn would cut $1 trillion from the Pentagon budget over a decade. He would block military retirees from the Tricare Prime health care plan, the option with the lowest out-of-pocket cost, saving $115 billion, and he would raise the prescription drug copayment under the program, as well as require higher out-of-pocket fees. He also would reduce the fleet of aircraft carriers from 11 to 10 and Navy air wings from 10 to nine.

"I have no doubt that both parties will criticize portions of this plan, and I welcome that debate," Coburn told reporters. "But it's not a legitimate criticism until you have a plan of your own."

Source: Yahoo

New Dr. Tom Coburn Ad for OK Senate Race with Dr. Coburn Email!

This is an example of why the Oklahoma grassroots worked so hard in 2004 to elect Dr. Coburn to the Senate in what was billed a very close race but he won going away. This time it is different as Dr. Coburn is very far out in front in his race -- Oklahomans will be sending him back to DC to continue to tackle earmarks, pork, Obamacare and any other mandates the federal government tries to force on us.

Dr. Coburn's email this morning gave all of us on his distribution list a smile to realize some of these Republican newcomers to Senate races running in States with current Democrat Senators are going to win and join Dr. Coburn in the Senate to continue the fight.

We are also going to be keeping our Republican Senate seats Red this year that are up for election in 2010 which all tied together is going to make for an extremely interesting election night.   Just happy this time that Dr. Coburn is way out in front and we can breath election night unlike 2004 waiting for returns and realizing he WON!  In 2004 George W Bush was reelected and Oklahoma Republicans for only the 2nd time in history took control of the OK House. 

Dear Sharon,

We are just weeks away from Election Day and I am optimistic that voters in Oklahoma and across the country are ready to make a difference for the future of our country.

This election year is an historic opportunity to send new leadership to Washington and change the way Congress works.

As I have traveled around Oklahoma during this campaign, I have been asked many times about what is happening in other Senate races around the country. Many of you are curious to know who some of the other Senate candidates are who would join our cause in fighting reckless and wasteful spending, holding career politicians and bureaucrats accountable to the American people, and restoring the principles of limited government given to us by our Founders.

I am hopeful that there are several emerging leaders who, if elected on November 2, will serve with the perspective that caring more about the next generation is more important than the next election.

Many of these candidates have tough races in their home states but it is my hope that they can win their races and join me in Washington to help change the culture of the Senate:

Joe Miller (Alaska)
http://joemiller.us/

Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)
http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/

Ken Buck (Colorado)
http://buckforcolorado.com/

Christine O’Donnell (Delaware)
http://christine2010.com/

Marco Rubio (Florida)
http://www.marcorubio.com/

Dino Rossi (Washington)
http://www.dinorossi.com/

Ron Johnson (Wisconsin)
http://www.blogger.com/goog_2091408325

Sharron Angle (Nevada)
http://sharronangle.com/

Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire)
http://www.ayotteforsenate.com/

Jim Huffman (Oregon)
http://www.huffmanforsente.com/

Carly Fiorina (California)
http://www.carlyforca.com/

Roy Blunt (Missouri)
http://www.royblunt.com/

Len Britton (Vermont)
http://www.lenbritton.com/

I truly believe this is an election year opportunity like no other and I am excited about the possibility of serving in the Senate with these leaders who will work with me to do what’s right and best for our country and for the future of our kids and grandkids.

Thank you for the support you have shown to me and my efforts in the Senate for nearly six years. Together, we have made a difference in many ways but there is so much work left to do to help restore our country. I look forward to the opportunity to serve our state for a second and final term in the Senate and continue the work you sent me to do in Washington.

Again, thank you for your support and for caring about the future of America.

Sincerely,


Tom A. Coburn, MD

Sen. Coburn: Democrats Intentionally Set Up ObamaCare to Fail

Unspent 2005 recovery money prompts criticism of Louisiana in US Senate

Five years later they have still not spent the Recovery money in the Gulf? These same people had a lot to say about the slow reaction of the Federal Government, but they have topped them. While FEMA moves at a very slow pace, even they move faster than the Gulf Coast states. Any money after five years not spent, should be returned to the Federal Government. Wait -- that would give Obama more money to waste so that it is not a good idea.

Five years to spend emergency funds does call into question whey they were deemed 'emergency' in the beginning.

In one sentence LA spokesman says the funds have been allocated already while in the next sentence they want to perhaps start a new housing program -- which is it -- funds are allocated or not.

Think Dr. Coburn (R-OK) needs to request a full accounting from all the Gulf States that received 'emergency funding' on where they spent our tax dollars -- we are confident waste is prevelant in the spending of 'emergency' funds. Under the former Governor, LA kept losing the money from the fund to help homeowners and couldn't find it.

Unspent 2005 recovery money prompts criticism of Louisiana in U.S. Senate
Published: Friday, June 18, 2010, 7:45 AM Updated: Friday, June 18, 2010, 9:36 AM
Bruce Alpert, Times-Picayune

WASHINGTON -- Louisiana has spent only 77 percent of the emergency community development block grants approved for housing needs after the 2005 hurricanes, and other Gulf states have an even lower percentage, prompting questions by an Oklahoma senator on whether the money can really be defined as "emergency."

Sen. Tom Coburn, the top Republican on the Permanent Senate Subcommittee on Investigations, who requested the funding data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, said taxpayers "would likely be surprised to find out a portion" -- about $3 billion -- of the $13 billion allocated to Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina "remains unspent."

Christina Stephens, spokeswoman for the Louisiana Recovery Authority, said that "the bottom line is that we've spent the lion's share of our recovery funds over the past four years under very difficult circumstances."

In a letter to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan, Coburn said that while the federal government rightly allocated "significant federal resources" to the "unprecedented damage to the Gulf Coast, serious questions need to be asked about whether this money was appropriately designated as emergency funding."

Coburn spokesman John Hart said the report on unspent 2005 hurricane emergency funds raises the "broader issue of government's inability to respond efficiently to emergencies."

"It' more relevant than ever," he said, alluding to the ongoing crisis with the BP oil spill.

Hart said it also raises the question of whether, with growing deficits, Congress and the Obama administration ought to use some of the unspent hurricane emergency money to meet some of the nation's current spending needs.

But Stephens said "calling these funds surplus is completely wrong."

"They're all programmed in various purposes in accordance to our federally approved action plan amendments," she said.

Moreover, she said, Louisiana didn't receive all its emergency block grant funding in 2005. It received the money in three installments, she said, with the last one not coming through until November 2007.

"It was a pretty hard slog to get the funds we have now," Stephens said.

According to the HUD report provided to Coburn's staff, Louisiana has disbursed $10.365 billion of the $13.4 billion allocated by the federal government in emergency block grant funding, or 77.3 percent. By comparison, Mississippi has spent 62.8 percent of its $5.4 billion allotment; Alabama, 75 percent of the $95 million provided, Florida only 38.2 percent of the $183 million provided, while Texas spent only 56.5 percent of its $503 million.

Stephens defended the state's distribution of emergency community block grant funding, which has spanned two administrations, Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco's and Republican Bobby Jindal's.

"Our recovery from Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita has been complicated by two new hurricanes in 2008 -- Gustav and Ike -- and the national economic meltdown," Stephens said. "A poor economy nationwide means that homeowners can't always get financing to complete rebuilding and that private investment is slow in some other recovery projects."

"Many of our rebuilding funds are leveraged against sources of financing. If that financing doesn't come through, then our funding can't be spent. And, of course, the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico isn't helping things in Louisiana."

She said there also is a labyrinth of federal regulations about using HUD funds vs. Federal Emergency Management Agency funds and "wrinkles" in the Stafford Act, which dictates federal government's response to disasters.

"I assure you, all of our funds are obligated to a purpose and in the process of being spent on securing Louisiana's long-term recovery from the terrible devastation of 2005," Stephens said. "No one wants our recovery to be complete more than we in Louisiana do."

Louisiana hopes some of the unspent funds can be used to launch a program for residents who have unmet housing needs.

Excerpt: Read more about misuse of tax dollars at NOLA.com